7 ms·
Wales' 20mph speed limit: How has the first month gone?
- Rebelgecko 3y agoEveryone supports measures that save lives until they realize that sometimes it's a mild inconvenience.
- bagels 3y agoAnyone able to translate this? "If someone is doing 20, you have a proper tailback." Specifically a "proper tailback"
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- leoedin 3y agoA tailback is a traffic jam / queue. A "proper tailback" is a really big traffic jam. "Proper" in this context basically means big or major.
- beardyw 3y agoThough it's a tailback of people who plan to exceed 20mph, otherwise how is it a tailback?
- p0w3n3d 3y agoAs a foreigner, I love British English. It's like a puzzle to me every time. Words that I have used many times, but in different meanings.
- urbandw311er 3y agoHmm, I don’t really know what “British English” is, here in Britain we speak English! I am reliably informed that our language has spread to other countries who have their own interesting and sometimes peculiar variations. We give these variations labels such as “American English” to distinguish them from the original.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- thedailymail 3y agoIt means a line of vehicles behind you; a traffic jam. https://www.wordnik.com/words/tailback https://www.wordnik.com/words/tailback
- Paul_S 3y agoUK over the years has been destroying something immensely valuable that you can't get back quickly. For example, there are barely any speed cameras on local roads in the UK (compared to other European countries) and yet almost everyone drives under the limit. It's the same with police not needing guns. I think people just don't understand how valuable (and unusual) this is. Edit: As has been pointed out to me, there are a lot of speed cameras in the UK, but half of them are in the London area where I don't drive (and the rest are mostly motorways) which is why I had that impression.
- yellow_lead 3y agoCan you elaborate how this is being destroyed? Not sure if you mean Brexit, other law changes, or this one in particular.
- ovi256 3y agoPolicing by consensus. People respected the rules because they agreed with the rules and trusted the rulemakers. Now the trust in rulemakers is gone and some people disagree with some rules. I wonder what the impact of this policing by consensus was. Did the UK spend a lower percentage of GDP on policing than peer nations ? I don't think they have lower crime numbers. Surely not in London.
- Paul_S 3y agoThat's exactly what I meant. If people agree to the rules you don't need to waste resources policing them.
- gumballindie 3y agoThats factually incorrect. The uk has the third largest number of speed cameras in europe, below only russia and italy. It’s quite annoying having cameras everywhere frankly.
- beardyw 3y ago
- noobermin 3y agoThe "faster to bike" is a sign that may be driving isn't necessary after all. This article is kind of silly, and it's even worse seeing it from the BBC. I remember as a young person thr BBC felt more impartial than US news orgs but this article reads like a "news" piece from a sinclair owned station ranting about bikes and blacks.
- bogle 3y agoIt quotes people's opionions and experiences from both sides so it's impartial. Some of the quotes are actually pretty funny, particularly "proper tailback". There's certainly no ranting and no one critising cycling or minorities. Are you sure you're not projecting your general opinions of the BBC onto this piece?
- gumballindie 3y agoModern britain has no shortage of silly policies.
- Penyngton 3y agoOne of the few surviving industries we've got.
- gumballindie 3y agoSeems to be doing darn well and has the support of the masses.
- mojo74 3y agoBut I need to travel faster! Good luck https://www.tomtom.com/newsroom/explainers-and-insights/london-is-the-worlds-slowest-city/ https://www.tomtom.com/newsroom/explainers-and-insights/lond...
- xnorswap 3y agoLondon, that famously Welsh city?
- mojo74 3y agoThe point I'm making (albeit glibly) is that the perception of the public is that we shouldn't be imposing speed limits to our roads that appear too slow. However the reality is that in many places we can't even travel at the maximum speed allowed on them because of the sheer volume of traffic. I don't care either way tbh.
- jjgreen 3y agoLondon is the 4th Welsh city by population
- fsckboy 3y agoShould change the name of the place to "whales", then the whole world would join in trying to save them all. (No point in blubbering about it, there's strength in numbers!) > I went on a road trip a month on from the controversial change... with an open mind. It's not possible to have an open mind about it. If the law is based on large-number population statistics, an individual driving around talking to people will have zero basis to question the statistics. If the judgement is to be based on personal preferences, well then you don't have an open mind, you have your mind. There's nothing wrong with voting on policy based on personal opinion and preferences, but why tell me you have an open mind, as if other people don't?
- CalRobert 3y agoAs much as the comments from complaining drivers are frustrating, it reveals that the problem here is relying on speed limits and not street design. If you want drivers to go 20mph, you need to design the street so going any faster feels uncomfortable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bglWCuCMSWc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bglWCuCMSWc discuses this. Also, I notice that most of those drivers complaining don't address what it's like to have a small child who's a runner and is always trying to get loose of your grip and run in to the street.
- thereisnospork 3y agoI would add to your point that streets should be designed to the highest speed and throughput practical[0] for their locale. It's an obvious source of 'driver frustration' when the apparent objective of these changes is to add friction to transport. No one likes having to dodge speed bumps, or being stuck in traffic on a 'calmed' street. [0] which needs to be supported by e.g. separated bike lanes, well marked and signed x-walks, employment of limited access roads vs. stroads, enforcement, etc.
- CalRobert 3y agoI must admit I found your comment jarring at first, but I don't think we really disagree except on details. I enjoy driving fast in wide open spaces (through farmland on the autobahn for instance). But (and I think you see this) there is a key difference between a street and a road - a _street_ most definitely _should_ have things to slow drivers, because the faster the cars go, the less pleasant it is for anyone not in a car. Nobody likes walking next to 80 kph traffic. But if a system is well designed the only reason you're driving on a street is because it's your destination, and not something you're using to get somewhere else.
- thinkingemote 3y agoIn an nearby area where they have introduced 20mph for many streets the police have said that they have very low resources to properly enforce the limit and instead will be enforced "voluntarily". The council actually wanted more streets as 20mph but the police said that they really couldn't support the larger area effectively blocking it!
- anonymous_sorry 3y agoBut every road has a speed limit. Does changing the limit change the enforcement effort?
- alexfoo 3y agoA lot of 20mph limits as enforced simply by some motorists driving at <=20mph. This prevents anyone behind from speeding unless they go for some stupid overtaking manoeuvre. So, yes, simply sticking up a sign and not actively enforcing it (Police, speed cameras) can have a pretty good effect.
- thinkingemote 3y agoGood question as it's somewhat counter intuitive. I think that all roads are not equally looked at by the police. So you would have lets say 10 major roads that get a patrol twice a day, and a deployable manned speed camera between them. If we add 20 minor roads to the jobs, then the police would need extra manpower to drive down these roads and another couple of speed cameras and crew to cover this increased demand. The assumption I am making is that many of the 20 mph roads were not previously under active patrols / enforcements when they were 30mph. Perhaps it's a kind of active enforcement versus a passive kind.
- tialaramex 3y agoOnce in a while I have to travel to one of the other districts of the city I live in, and I'm reminded that I happen to live in the district which once had tram lines, and you can really tell. My friend moved his young family further out, rationalising that young kids need more outdoor space (their new house is physically smaller, but in an area with woodland) and he didn't like his old neighbourhood (students, drug addicts), but every time I visit the first thing I have to do is risk my life, crossing a busy road with no pedestrian crossings, because everybody there (including them) drives everywhere. For a while the nice people I buy pizza from owned a restaurant (they began, and now continue, as a food truck, wood burning oven inside a converted vehicle) and it too was in a district that was converted to car-focused urban living in the 1970s or so. That time I at least discovered an intersection with a crossing, albeit low priority (ie arrive, press button, wait 2-3 minutes to cross) and their restaurant faced the river so that's quiet. I tend to think of the whole city as being like where I live -- rat runs diverted to a few arteries, heavy use of mandatory (Zebra or sometimes Puffin) crossings with moderate urgency for pedestrians or where I work (the city refused permission to close the road through our university, but authorised speed bumps and four very high urgency Puffins, so in effect it's faster to drive around it even though the road exists straight through it) -- but that's actually not true which is sad. I know where our existing MP lives, it's near me, I wonder where the next one (well, the candidate from the same party who will stand next time) lives ?
- soco 3y agoLol "puffin crossing" - I like the concept, here's the link for us non-uk people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puffin_crossing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puffin_crossing
- anonymous_sorry 3y agoNamed thematically with pelican crossings (originally pelicon crossings - PEdestrian LIght CONtrolled), since phased out.
- tialaramex 3y ago
- postingawayonhn 3y agoIn New Zealand the government has been working to drop many urban speed limits to 30kmh or 40kmh. Luckily a new government has just been elected who will reverse many of these reductions.
- CalRobert 3y agoWhy is this lucky?
- haspok 3y agoI find it amusing how they did not interview one single person who thought he or she might just choose a different way of transportation, instead of driving a car, unless absolutely necessary. I used to commute in the north between two mid-sized cities, and any time I checked taking the car instead of the combined bike+rail travel would not have been faster, only much more inconvenient and more expensive (parking costs a lot, and not always easy to find...). Today we have e-bikes and scooters, so hilly terrain is not a problem anymore. What I do think IS a problem is driving is still way too cheap in the UK, compared to other transportation methods.
- pjc50 3y agoWales manages to have both bad public transport and bad roads and bad weather and bad parking. Perhaps the speed limit drop is intended to "nudge" people, but I'm not convinced the alternatives are quite so ready yet.
- prmoustache 3y agoIn your list, only bad public transport is a limiter. The hills and perceived insecurity[1] are probably the biggest limiters to biking. The former being solved by e-bikes. Bad weather is not that hard to deal with than some people would think. [1] insecurity leads to either of these 2 things: - people are afraid to ride bikes - people feel they would need to use an helmet, which most don't want to, especially women, because it mess with their hair.
- eastbound 3y agoIf you compare train on a train-direct path, then there will be no other winner than trains. But I can make the same demonstration with planes: “If I live in Paris, how can I go to work in New York every morning? See, the Concorde is necessary.” More seriously: “If I live in suburbia, how can I change jobs in the city for a job which is not on the same train line?” It’s all about finding words to sustain one’s idea, not about caring for the lowlys. > Today we have e-bikes and scooters, so hilly terrain is not a problem anymore ebikes average at $100pm. I’m sure you will contradict me with lowballing, but there are also people for whom it’s much more expensive. And if you live with normal people, there are no bikes that you can keep secure at home or at work - we’re not all bourgeois with safe garages.
- stuaxo 3y agoCentral government has said they want to be pro "the motorist" and constantly threaten the BBC / put GB News types in charge and now we get articles like this. This is worse than the both sidesism of before, this is like reading an article from any of the right wing press.
- p0w3n3d 3y agoEvery car sold at the moment lowers the speed shown on the speedometer algorithmically. Therefore I can believe that although 20mph=32kph and I have problems reaching 32kph constantly on a gravel bike - when cars go 20mph they will go probably around 27kph which is the speed I can maintain on my bicycle. For something different - cars going at slow speeds emit more fumes and consume more fuel.
- alexfoo 3y ago> For something different - cars going at slow speeds emit more fumes and consume more fuel. There's research that refutes this for 30mph -> 20mph limit lowering. https://haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/lowering-speed-limits/widgets/31529/faqs#question9170 https://haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/lowering-speed-limits/widgets... " Do slower speeds cause congestion and pollution? Imperial College London's research into the impact of 20mph speed limits suggests they have no net negative impact on exhaust emissions. Results indicated clear benefits to driving style and associated particulate emissions. The research found that vehicles moved more smoothly, with fewer accelerations and decelerations, than in 30mph zones, reducing particulate emissions from tyre and brake wear. We have undertaken an Environmental Evaluation and are satisfied that the lowering of speeds will not have an adverse impact on the environment or air quality. The Environmental Evaluation recommendation was that no air quality modelling was therefore required. "
- hardware2win 3y ago>Every car sold at the moment lowers the speed shown on the speedometer algorithmically Your example increases speed shown 20mph shown and 32kmph being base means that 20mph shown and 27kmph being actual means shown is increased?
- pjc50 3y ago> Every car sold at the moment lowers the speed shown on the speedometer algorithmically. ? Do you mean "raises"? The legal requirement is that it MUST NOT under-report your speed. So generally they over-read by about 10% compared to GPS ground track speed measurement.
- a-french-anon 3y agoIf only speed limits were designed so that breaking them always equates "reckless driving", and not sometimes (often, here) "driving at a completely normal speed considering the surrounding environment". inb4 pitchfork raising amongst the anti-car rabble
- _dain_ 3y ago>inb4 pitchfork raising amongst the anti-car rabble I don't know why you think anti-car people would raise pitchforks at that. In fact this was my criticism of the proposal when I lived in Wales; there seemed to be little attempt to alter the street environments to match the lower limits. I want effective 20 mph zones and that can't happen just by changing a few speed limit signs. My prediction was that it would backfire: motorists behaviours wouldn't change, so the speed limits would be flouted even more than they are now. Councils wouldn't enforce it consistently, giving credence to the view that it's simply a revenue-generating scheme and/or a way for police to punish people arbitrarily. This is already the case for parking offenses; Cardiff motorists can park on double-yellows with almost complete impunity. Then, populist backlash, law gets repealed, making it even harder to get support for real street safety measures in the future.
- a-french-anon 3y agoBecause for some of them, the right speed limit is 0 kmh/mph aka "total car death".
- _dain_ 3y agoWell I'm sure that's the case for some of them but you shouldn't let jokers and extremists poison your opinion of what is in reality a quite sensible policy.
- sebstefan 3y agoAnti-car people are also in favor of narrowing roads and making them physically harder to navigate to force drivers to respect the speed limit >a-french-anon 20 miles per hour is 32km/h, 2 above the french residential limit of 30km/h
- maxehmookau 3y agoAs a cyclist (and a driver) in a city in England; this can't come to the rest of the UK fast enough. I see it as a failure of public policy, and a necessary result. Our streets are not designed for safe cycling and our public transport infrastructure is poor, at best. So the only way we can improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians is to reduce speed limits for cars across the board. The political will to improve road/pavement safety for pedestrians and cyclists is not there (there's a war on motorists, apparently?) so while cyclists have to (by law) use public roads then we have to reduce car speed limits to make it safe. Most modern cars have cruise control that work at 20mph, so the argument that it's difficult to stick to 20mph is lazy and incorrect. Studies out of Wales say that it adds approximately 30 seconds per journey and one of the quotes in this article _quoted a woman who does not drive!_
- simonbarker87 3y agoI’m a cyclist and disagree, given most urban bike vs car crashes happen way below 30 mph changing the speed limit won’t make a difference. What would make a difference is teaching people to cycle on the road confidently and correctly (eg taking the full lane when required) and also adding a cycling component to learning to drive to give drivers more empathy for cyclists. Both of these are too big to tackle so instead the solution is to blame speed and treat people like children.
- bogle 3y agoI agree with your points except that reducing speeds by even an average of 1mph does appear to reduce both collisions and the severity of those accidents by about 5%. https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/32217/evaluation-of-the-20mph-speed-limit-roll-out-three-years-post-implementation https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/32217/evaluation...
- gniv 3y agoThe towns in the part of France where I am also have this limit (30kmh). Hardly anyone obeys it of course. But it's interesting how they try to enforce it. On small roads they install speed humps and/or alternative-side parking. On through roads they cannot do that, since they would slow down emergency vehicles. So they put those fyi radars, which don't seem to have any effect anymore. The real automated camera+radar installations are rare and signalled ahead (by law?), and cars always obey the limit in those areas.
- lynx23 3y ago> Hardly anyone obeys it of course. Isn't is wonderful how vehicle owners are entitled to break the law, and nobody seems to care? Driving drunk, ignoring the speed limit, are all actions that directly endanger unrelated citizens. And all that vehicle operators have to say is "of course".
- soco 3y agoI'd say that's lack of enforcement "of course". And I really couldn't care less about people now claiming "ohh but that's stupid" - it's your country, vote against those speed measures if you don't like them. Or just follow them, because your own mates and not some reptilians voted for them.
- lynx23 3y agoI am a pedestrian. I am the one put in danger by reckless vehicle owners. No surprise that you "couldn't care less". Do you even realize that there is a demographic of people who don't own nor operate a car?
- soco 3y agoCould it be you are answering to a different comment? Edit to rehash my point: drivers will say they don't follow the speed limits because "they are stupid" but all in general, if somebody thinks a rule is stupid they shouldn't keep voting for the creators of said rules. Ignoring rules should be punished and there's an obvious lack on this side, if the people can safely ignore rules they aren't really rules are they. Anyway having those speeding rules means you as pedestrian seem to have a majority right now, and if somebody wants to fight against that majority they should motivate a different majority. All democratic innit.
- reedf1 3y agoPeople don't intuitively understand the difference between phase velocity and group velocity. Often you will see people speeding between stoplights, never to actually break away from the same "wave packet" that you are within. When these limits are introduced there is often no affect on journey times whatsoever.
- mjg59 3y agoThere are numerous references to increased congestion as a result of the reduced speed limits in built-up areas, but the UK has a fairly strong "You should always be 2 seconds behind the car in front" element to driving rules, and naively if there's two seconds between every car then the number of cars passing a particular point in a given amount of time is going to be the same regardless of how fast they're travelling, so is there a real model where a lower speed limit reduces throughput in a meaningful way without violating this constraint?
- afiori 3y agoThis is asymptotically true for high speeds but false for low speeds where 2-seconds-car is comparable to the average length of a vehicle. If the speed limit was (magically) 0.001 mph then raising it to 0.002 mph would double throughput.
- alexfoo 3y agoBut 20mph is not low enough for that to be a problem. 2 seconds at 20mph is ~18m.
- afiori 3y agoIt is not an overwhelming factor but if for example you were to go from 20mph to 10mph you would see an effect. Overrall lower speed limits (when streets are designed to take advantage of them) have a lot of benefits, this is in the category of minor drawbacks.
- jorlow 3y agoI don't know either way whether 20mph makes sense in places like Wales, but at least in central London I think the shift to 20mph speed limits is great. Based on what I've seen, I'd be shocked if it isn't providing a meaningful improvement in safety for cyclists and pedestrians and lowering the severity when there is a car crash. And it seems like it also provides an extra nudge towards people using public transit rather than driving/ubering.
- devnull3 3y agoFor me the way manual gears are calibrated at present, it is difficult to maintain speed at 20mph. It is very easy to overshoot compared to 30mph.
- simonbarker87 3y agoIt's the same in many automatics as well
- bogle 3y agoSome actual studies. Edinburgh: https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/32217/evaluation-of-the-20mph-speed-limit-roll-out-three-years-post-implementation https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/32217/evaluation... Belfast: https://jech.bmj.com/content/77/1/17 https://jech.bmj.com/content/77/1/17 Traffic volume is reduced with more people choosing walking and cycling. Speeds are reduced only a little (you weren't going as quickly as you thought anyway) but potentially reducing accidents. The Edinburgh data shows a dramatic reduction in accidents, down almost a third.
- devnull3 3y agoThis will impact the driving tests as well. A typical practical driving test lasts for 35-40 min. But with 20mph it will cover less distance. Interesting to see how the DVSA (the body which conducts these tests) handle this. Increasing test duration means the backlog (which is already huge) will increase. Keeping same will mean less road features will be tested.
- alexfoo 3y agoRefresher tests every 10 years would do more to solve the current driving standards problem in the UK. But it'd be political suicide for any Government that tried to introduce it.